NormanH

There are so many variables! Was it  a GP or a specialist? If a specialist was the patient sent by a GP who has been declared? Is that Doctor "conventionné"? which secteur? Could the Doctor claim 'dépassement d'heures' ? ( a bit like overtime [:)] Was the blood test for one particular thing, or a 'bilan sanguine' that is a complete check? I'm not interrogating, just trying to show how different two people's visit to a Doctor could be.. All that said it doesn't sound like the right proportion of cost/reimbursement

I think this is the article http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=560851&in_page_id=1770&ito=1490

Of course in one sense French GPs don't get 'pay' in the sense of a regular salary. What they earn depends on how many people they see, which is why they always seem so 'caring' and say 'come back if you have the slightest doubt'[:)]

SD "Retired British people in France with an E121 are liable for 30% of their treatment costs like anyone else here.   A UK resident pensioner gets his/her NHS treatment for free." I am not sure that the 30% covers the difference between the systems. Perhaps the UK should offer a scheme whereby elderly Brits can get treated as quickly as they are in France just by paying 30% of the cost? In any case it can be paid by taking a 'Mutuelle' the cost of which is subsidised  for retired Brits by younger healthy French people who are paying into it without taking much out. Retired British people in France with an E121 get 100% for serious diseases which count as "affections longue durée"  and most of these are more common in the Pensioners' age group. On reflection the French who have paid all their lives into building up a superior system are subsidising the Brits who haven't contributed to the development of the service, even if they are now contributing now that they need it

[quote user="cooperlola"] However, French early retired pensioners, if in CMU B, pay 8% - as do other Europeans in that scheme.  [/quote] Why would someone retired from employment be in the CMU? Wouldn't they still be covered by the Régime Génerale ? "Vous dépendez du régime de sécurité sociale dont vous dépendiez avant l'attribution de la retraite ou pension. " http://vosdroits.service-public.fr/.....

There are even Roumanian doctors working in France now. There is a great shortage in some deep country areas, where young French Doctors don't want the extensive travelling that visiting elderly patients involves, nor the very long hours that can come from being the only Doctor with no locum available. Consequently some Maires have recruited Doctors from other countries. There would certainly be difficult tests of professional French to pass. Some Universities offer courses: for example http://medecine.u-clermont1.fr/portail/accueil_etrangers/accueil_etrangers_index.htm and here is an example of someone who has put her CV online looking for a post http://www.medecins.enligne-fr.com/mini_cv.php?code=c1187c23b939ae17

[quote user="Rich1972"]Hi all Can anyone offer a definition of what 'comprehensive health insurance' means? [/quote] Probably something which covers both the part usually paid by the Sécurité Sociale (the amount depends on what is beibng paid for, but can be about 70% of the cost) and the part that needs 'topping up' for which many people have a 'Mutuelle' paid privately.

I have absolutely no doubt of your professional knowledge and experience in this field :-)  but  is about something more important than your ego.   SD has found us the 'texte' What I am asking for is references that show how "reconstruction" as in Des dépenses de construction, de reconstruction, d'agrandissement ou d'amélioration, supportées par le vendeur et réalisées par une entreprise is being interpreted in France. The OP says that his Notaire has indicated a change of interpretation. Is this happening all over, or is it another example of different offices putting different interpretations on things? Are there any written guidelines, and where can they be found? Where does this leave the 15% of the purchase price that can be deducted if you have no 'justicatifs' I would have thought that is this is not counted as capital expenditure in your terms it wouldn't be deductible either, but has anybody any evidence that this is happening? Lorsque le contribuable......  n'est pas en état d'apporter la justification de ces dépenses, une majoration égale à 15 % du prix d'acquisition est pratiquée Post edited by the moderators. Users must not post messages which: Are insulting, abusive, racist, sexist, or derogatory in any way to others, whether they are individuals or companies, users of the Forum or not. Contain explicit language or vulgarities (whether written in French, English or any other language)

In fact what should happen is that the whole of Europe adopt a similar system. The choice is between the British one of using the criterion of residence, paid for in part by tax and partly by Social Security, or that of the rest of Europe, where the payments for health are more clearly earmarked. If that was brought in in the UK, retired people both in the UK and abroad would continue to pay Social Security contributions on their pensions, as is the case in France. As it is British people in France have their  (more expensive) French health care paid for by the UK on the E121; not very fair on those who stay in the UK and have to accept the NHS, but have paid the same contributions during their working lives.

[quote user="ams"]32 years as a FCA, 25 years as a FITI, 32 years in professional practice, but hey what would I know ?   ams [/quote] I do apologise! I didn't realise you had been living and practising in France for so long. I assumed you were one of those Brits who come over and assume that things are exactly the same as in the UK, including ways of warking and the interpretation of Law. Obviously not. As this has very important consequences for some of us, perhaps you can point us to the French sources of your information: after all you are the expert, and we bow to your knowledge, but would like to see what to quote to substantiate it if we have to.

You are very sensible to seek a quiet life. There is nothing to be gained by antagonising the Maire. I wonder if your Notaire did a proper job, and is now feigning ignorance. Normally any "servitude de passage" ( like a right of way, and not at all as big as a chemin rural) is noted in the acte authentique in both senses..if you have one over neighbours' land, and if they have one over yours, and should have been brought to your attention at the reading of the acte when you signed. If you read French ok you might like to look at this site: http://www.jurisprudentes.org/bdd/faqs_article.php?id_article=2783 but note that it is not an official 'texte' just a site giving advice about these sorts of problems.

[quote user="Sunday Driver"][quote user="NormanH"] Nobody has yet found a 'texte' other than the one I quoted. "Le prix des travaux de construction, reconstruction, agrandissement, rénovation ou amélioration" [/quote] Perhaps you missed the post containing the actual text of the tax code.... I think you'll find that the word 'rénovation' was introduced by your unofficial website - there's no actual mention of it in the legal code. We were posting at the same time, so I didn't see your post, which provides for the first time exactly what I asked for before..the official texte .Thank you On the other hand it doesn't change the gist of what I said before. Even if you take out the word 'renovation ' (which is still there in the site of the Notaires of Paris!) what I posted was "In that case it all depends on the interpretation put on 'reconstruction'... For example a wall that has to be re-built in my terms is reconstruction, even though it could be called a replacement." It still seems to me that the crux is in the interpretation of the word reconstruction, and I don't see any mention of "capital expenditure"   and " revenue expenditure." in the texte. What about a roof that has caved in?  The building has one, but it needs to be rebuilt.  Isn't that reconstruction?         [/quote]

[quote user="ams"]No, it was never allowed as it was a replacement and therefore not capital expenditure. However if the building had no wiring then putting in wire would be capital expenditure and therefore be allowed for CGT purposes.   In the past such costs were allowed to "slip through" the system, now perhaps it has changed, the legal situation has not changed.   ams [/quote] Nobody has yet found a 'texte' other than the one I quoted. "Le prix des travaux de construction, reconstruction, agrandissement, rénovation ou amélioration" In that case it all depends on the interpretation put on 'reconstruction'... For example a wall that has to be re-built in my terms is reconstruction, even though it could be called a replacement. You could argue the same for a roof...which is a rénovation. Where did you fish out this distinction ams?

I have found another way round it! SORTED I hope ! Have found this article, and blocked the number http://www.01net.com/editorial/351378/les-freenautes-vont-pouvoir-bloquer-les-coups-de-fil-indesirables/?rss Thanks for all the suggestions..

It is illegal. There is an article in today's MidiLibre about a German man who won a case against an Agency who refused to let to him on the grounds that he didn't have a French ID card http://www.midilibre.com/articles/2008/04/19/20080419-FRANCE-MONDE-Bail-refuse-agence-condamnee.php5 Post edited by a moderator to replace article text with a link.

The SACEM are certainmy not scammers, and they don't joke! While I believe it is a private, not a Governlmental organisation you will need to have made the correct declarations to them if you have a "contrôl"

Did she say since when this change has come about? The site of the Notaires of Paris is still quoting theold (new!) version du montant réel des éventuels travaux de construction, reconstruction, agrandissement, rénovation ou amélioration réalisés par des  entreprises In these cases where a professionam quotes somthing a bit bizarre  I find it can help to politely ask for the reference no of the 'texte' so you can see it for yourself

Compare my review of the Ch'tis here with the one in today's Independent http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/film-and-tv/features/meet-the-french-directors-bemoaning-the-gallic-film-boom-810827.html me : "It is a mildly amusing.." Independent "A pleasant, mildly funny but mediocre movie," me "much that is derivative and anodyne " Independent "a cheerful, cliché-ridden, underscripted attempt " me "an escape from reality" Independent "He has tapped in to the same vein of French sentimentalism" me "It's not "la Grande Vadrouille" Independent " It does not deserve to be considered alongside La Grande Vadrouille," they also compared it to "allo allo as I did in Jill's thread about French films for Art or Entertainment Do you think the Independent have a lurker in here

[quote user="cooperlola"]Like others, I think this is very suspicious.  The funds should be in the notaire's account at the signing.  When we bought, the cheque for the balance was handed over on the spot to the sellers, and we believed this was normal practice. I would complain to the Notaire's own association, I smell a rat here: http://www.notaires.fr/notaires/notaires.nsf/V_TC_PUB/CLAIMS [/quote] Not necessarily  normal practice to hand over the money on the spot. It can happen but the Notaire can hang on to the money for a long time ( about 2 months I believe) and some of them top up their earnings with the interest accrued

No bad feelings! I quoted it really to underline your point that France is not nearly as PC as the UK They still use "Nègre " for example which I find extraordinary or 'cretin' as an insult... I didn't like Benny Hill, but I did enjoy 'outrageous' humour  like Round the Horne.

I have bought and sold four times, and each time I bought I had to pay in advance into the Notaire's account. Once it was a long time getting the money out of him for a sale, but I can only say that in my experience in France it all goes OK in the end. Bon Courage for your friends

I believe that oleander (laurier rose) is also very poisonous And it is so pretty... Toxicité : C’est une des plante les plus dangereuses de nos régions. Feuilles, fleurs, écorce et bois, frais ou séchés, sont toxiques à très faible dose. On considère qu’une seule feuille peut être mortelle pour l’homme. 'it is one of the post dangerous plants found in our region: leaves, flowers, bark and stem, fresh or dried are poisonois in even very small quantities. Even a single leaf can be deadly.' http://www.aujardin.info/plantes/laurier-rose.php

[quote user="Logan"][quote user="Will"]  And why should they when they can get a good package of benefits, paid for by those who are in work? [/quote] Because Will the world constantly changes, except in France of course. That's the perception not the reality. Like most institutions who live beyond their means. France is like the boy with his finger in the dam. [/quote] And what comparison would you use for UK plc?

But in the fantastically popular film "Bienvenue chez les Ch'tis " which has just come out in France there is great mirth made out of the fact that an able-bodied man pretends to be disabled in order to get preferential treatment for a good posting: he mimics spasms ( supposed to be a funny movement) and the lame joke (!!) at the end is that when the person checking on him leaves he forgets he is supposed to be wheelchair-bound, and stands up. On another thread on this board I was mocked as being PC Norman when I pointed this out.

You should be VERY proud of yourself ..congratulations.[:D]